A technology to solve the water-energy-food crisis? Mapping sociotechnical configurations of agrivoltaics using Q-methodology

IF 6.9 2区 经济学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES Energy Research & Social Science Pub Date : 2024-12-01 DOI:10.1016/j.erss.2024.103872
Matthew Cotton , Stephen Langford , Anne Kuria , Karen Parkhill
{"title":"A technology to solve the water-energy-food crisis? Mapping sociotechnical configurations of agrivoltaics using Q-methodology","authors":"Matthew Cotton ,&nbsp;Stephen Langford ,&nbsp;Anne Kuria ,&nbsp;Karen Parkhill","doi":"10.1016/j.erss.2024.103872","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>“Agrivoltaics” are solar photovoltaic panels mounted above productive farmland so that energy and food production can occur simultaneously on the same plot. Agrivoltaics are proffered as a means to reduce food-energy land use conflicts, and to ameliorate rural community opposition to ground-mounted solar farms. In this study we examine the socio-economic and environmental claims around agrivoltaics as a set of competing sociotechnical configurations, assessed through a Q-methodology and qualitative analysis of 30 responses from technical, NGO and social opposition respondents from 14 different countries. We find three emergent sociotechnical configurations, labelled: 1) Agrivoltaics for livelihood diversification and poverty alleviation; 2) Opposing agrivoltaics – asserting community control and procedural justice, and 3) Scaling up a ‘triple win’ for agrivoltaics – centring innovation and ownership models. We identify strong support for agrivoltaics in livelihood diversification across rural communities, and for meeting multiple food, energy and water security goals simultaneously. However, stakeholder opposition from technological intrusion of agrivoltaics in rural places and a lack of consensus on what role governmental authorities, landowners and community cooperatives can play are key barriers to deployment and upscaling of this niche technology. We find that agrivoltaics can stimulate diverse sociotechnical configurations of energy and agriculture, with great potential for improving energy and food security, though issues of visual intrusion and perceived ‘technology in the wrong place’, lack of clarity on funding and planning models, and improper scales of governance and procedural injustice could potentially stymie rollout for both smallholders and larger agribusiness schemes.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48384,"journal":{"name":"Energy Research & Social Science","volume":"119 ","pages":"Article 103872"},"PeriodicalIF":6.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Energy Research & Social Science","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214629624004638","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

“Agrivoltaics” are solar photovoltaic panels mounted above productive farmland so that energy and food production can occur simultaneously on the same plot. Agrivoltaics are proffered as a means to reduce food-energy land use conflicts, and to ameliorate rural community opposition to ground-mounted solar farms. In this study we examine the socio-economic and environmental claims around agrivoltaics as a set of competing sociotechnical configurations, assessed through a Q-methodology and qualitative analysis of 30 responses from technical, NGO and social opposition respondents from 14 different countries. We find three emergent sociotechnical configurations, labelled: 1) Agrivoltaics for livelihood diversification and poverty alleviation; 2) Opposing agrivoltaics – asserting community control and procedural justice, and 3) Scaling up a ‘triple win’ for agrivoltaics – centring innovation and ownership models. We identify strong support for agrivoltaics in livelihood diversification across rural communities, and for meeting multiple food, energy and water security goals simultaneously. However, stakeholder opposition from technological intrusion of agrivoltaics in rural places and a lack of consensus on what role governmental authorities, landowners and community cooperatives can play are key barriers to deployment and upscaling of this niche technology. We find that agrivoltaics can stimulate diverse sociotechnical configurations of energy and agriculture, with great potential for improving energy and food security, though issues of visual intrusion and perceived ‘technology in the wrong place’, lack of clarity on funding and planning models, and improper scales of governance and procedural injustice could potentially stymie rollout for both smallholders and larger agribusiness schemes.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Energy Research & Social Science
Energy Research & Social Science ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES-
CiteScore
14.00
自引率
16.40%
发文量
441
审稿时长
55 days
期刊介绍: Energy Research & Social Science (ERSS) is a peer-reviewed international journal that publishes original research and review articles examining the relationship between energy systems and society. ERSS covers a range of topics revolving around the intersection of energy technologies, fuels, and resources on one side and social processes and influences - including communities of energy users, people affected by energy production, social institutions, customs, traditions, behaviors, and policies - on the other. Put another way, ERSS investigates the social system surrounding energy technology and hardware. ERSS is relevant for energy practitioners, researchers interested in the social aspects of energy production or use, and policymakers. Energy Research & Social Science (ERSS) provides an interdisciplinary forum to discuss how social and technical issues related to energy production and consumption interact. Energy production, distribution, and consumption all have both technical and human components, and the latter involves the human causes and consequences of energy-related activities and processes as well as social structures that shape how people interact with energy systems. Energy analysis, therefore, needs to look beyond the dimensions of technology and economics to include these social and human elements.
期刊最新文献
Desert or garden? Energy sacrifice zones, territorial affordances and competing visions for post-coal landscapes: The case of the Czechoslovak Army Mine Retrofit information challenges and potential solutions: Perspectives of households, retrofit professionals and local policy makers in the United Kingdom Institutional entrepreneuring for energy poverty: The role of boundary work in developing a collaborative product-service system for household appliances A technology to solve the water-energy-food crisis? Mapping sociotechnical configurations of agrivoltaics using Q-methodology Justice or just plans? Reviewing the energy transition strategy of Brazil's Ceará state
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1